DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS 701 S. COURTHOUSE ROAD, SUITE 1001 ARLINGTON, VA 22204-2490 Docket No: 3751-18 Ref: Signature date This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to Title 10, United States Code, Section 1552. After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board for Correction of Naval Records (Board) found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Consequently, your application has been denied. Although your application was not filed in a timely manner, the Board found it in the interest of justice to waive the statute of limitations and consider your application on its merits. A three-member panel of the Board, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 15 August 2019. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, relevant portions of your naval record, as well as applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Regarding your request for a personal appearance, the Board determined a personal appearance with or without counsel will not materially add to its understanding of the issues involved. Therefore, the Board determined a personal appearance was not necessary and considered your case based on the evidence of record. You enlisted in the Navy and reenlisted on 19 May 2005. You served without disciplinary incident until you received nonjudicial punishment on 15 March 2007 for abusing a public animal, failure to obey an order, and dereliction of duty. A medical report of 1 November 2007 shows you were diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder and adjustment disorder with mixed disturbances of emotions and conduct. You were determined to be “fit to continue on active duty” by a physical evaluation board on 4 December 2007, but because you were not worldwide assignable, your commanding officer recommended administrative separation. Subsequently, you were notified of pending administrative separation action by reason of convenience of the government due to condition not a disability. After you waived your rights, your commanding officer recommended that you be discharged with a general, under honorable conditions (GEN), characterization of service by reason of convenience of the government due to a condition not a disability. The discharge authority approved this recommendation and directed that you be discharged with a GEN characterization of service by reason of convenience of the government. On 8 February 2008, due to an intervening event not the record, received an honorable characterization of service. The Board carefully reviewed your application, weighed all potentially mitigating factors, and considered your contention that your NJP and reduction in rank were unjust. Specifically, you contend that you received NJP and were reduced in rank due to “training your dog in a combat zone against Navy regulation” because you were utilizing Army guidance since you were stationed with the Army as an augmentee voluteer. You further contend the version of Navy guidance you were disciplined under is no longer valid and the current version contains guidance for training working dogs in a combat zone. The Board also noted the commanding officer’s comment that your NJP was due to your guard dog suffering from a bad ear infection” and considered your explanation that the dog had chronic ear infections, which was very common for dogs deployed to very sandy environments. You further contend an ear infection is not abuse and does not warrant NJP or reduction in rank. Additionally, the Board considered your contention that you were “railroaded for a vendetta” and “blindsided by trumped-up charges” and would “never hurt a dog”. Lastly, the Board considered your service in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina and noted the documentation provided in support of your accomplishments. After careful consideration, however, the Board concluded that you did not demonstrate that the NJP or reduction in rank were with material error or unjustly imposed and determined clemency was not warranted. The Board also considered your contention that block 12a of your Certificate of Release or Discharge from Active Duty (DD Form 214) reflects your active duty service date and not the “date entered AD this period”. The Board, by copy of this letter, has requested correction of the administrative error by Commander, Navy Personnel Command (NPC) (Code PERS-312), 5720 Integrity Drive, Millington, TN 38055-3120. It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon the submission of new matters, which will require you to complete and submit a new DD Form 149. New matters are those not previously presented to or considered by the Board. In this regard, it is important to keep in mind that a presumption of regularity attaches to all official records. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice. Sincerely, 9/19/2019